Blossom and Fruitlet Thinners Affect Crop Load, Fruit Weight, Seed Number, and Return Bloom of `Northern Spy' Apple
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the effect of blossom and fruitlet thinners on crop load, fruit weight, seed development during the year of treatment, and the subsequent year effect on return bloom, fruit weight and yield, a field trial using the biennial apple cultivar `Northern Spy' ( Malus × domestica Borkh.) was established. Treatments applied at full bloom included ATS (ammonium thiosulphate) [12% (w/v) nitrogen, 26% (w/v) S]; TD [15.9% (w/v) diacarboxylic acid, 5.5% (w/v) dimethylalkylamine salt (Endothal)] and SCY [57% (w/v) pelargonic acid (Scythe)]. At 18 days after full bloom (DAFB), oil treatments [98% (w/v) mineral oil (Superior “70” oil)] were applied with S [480 g·L -1 a.i. carbaryl (Sevin XLR)] and without as a means of increasing the efficacy of S. BA [19 g·L -1 a.i. 6-benzyladenine/1.9 g·L -1 a.i. gibberellins 4+7 (Accel)]; S; and/or SA [100% (w/w) 2-hydroxybenzoic acid (salicylic acid)], were also applied in a factorial arrangement on the same day. Fruit abscission was significantly increased the year of treatment with BA, S, BA + S, BA + SA, S + SA, BA + S + SA, oil, and S + oil. Average fruit weight was enhanced by S, BA + S, BA + SA, S + SA, BA + S + SA, and S + oil although in the latter treatment the crop load was very low. Only treatments that included BA reduced the number of fully developed seeds per fruit and seed number per trunk cross-sectional area (TCA) and increased return bloom. Defining the number of fully developed seeds per tree coupled with crop load is proposed as a predictor of return bloom in `Northern Spy'.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".